Does Russia have us outgunned? Part 4 (short answer: yes)

Does Russia have the US outgunned?

Part 4 of the translation of:

http://inosmi.ru/military/20170302/238812175.html

Obama officially ended the use of miultichannel missiles in US air defense missiles: http://allthingsnuclear.org/emacdonald/the-end-of-mirvs-for-u-s-icbms

He did not require Russia to do likewise. This unilateral disarmament is apparently ok with the rest of the government too. In other words, all this palavering about the Russian influence on US elections is just politics. It has nothing to do with real life and the elites know it. You can bet that if the pols and journos who infest our environment were really serious about defense, they would be protesting the unilateral disarmament tolerated by our government, not snivelling about Putin influencing our elections, without an ounce of proof. In reality, they know the Russians are not about to invade Europe. Only the fools who read their swill are dumb enough to buy that nonsense. So what is it all about? My suspicion is that they are simply playing to their clients, the Saudis and allies, eg,, in Tel Aviv, who donate to the campaigns.

The following article shows that the current strategy using ground based intercept missiles is a huge boondoggle, but congress is happy to spend your money on it as long as you are ignorant of this fact. Will Trump be the one to wake us up or will he spend even more of our dollars on the boondoggles?

https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/182175-the-united-states-missile-defenthese-system-will-never-work-which-is-why-were-spending-more-money-on-it

Expert opinions that I have read tell us that even the sophisticated multichannel Russian air defense systems used with the S-400, and soon the S-500 missiles, are probably not going to be able to stop a hypersonic missile. Both the Russians and the US had therefore best start being friendly. God knows, Russia has tried over and over again.

But what would the pols do without an inmaginary enemy? They’d have to start actually solving the problems they create daily in the inner cities, in health care, crime, gangs, foreign military engagements killing civilians for profit, etc.

One of the best weapons against ignorance regarding “the other” is to learn his language. What I have learned is that there is no “other,” none at all. But there is an enemy, and he is ignorance. I recognized that I had to fight this enemy first in myself and then in others. Once he is vanquished, the world will be a safe place — at least as safe as before the Neocons and the “Enlightened Ones” like Bonaparte, Hitler, Bush, Clinton, Obama, McCain, Graham, Schumer and all that gang arrived on the scene to “help.”

I’ve been in the language learning and teaching biz for over 45 years now and am still going strong. The most important information I can impart about languages now is HOW to learn a language. Linked below is Part 1, for you or your loved ones who may wish to learn a foreign language. Part 2 will explain a breakthrough method for learners on the advanced level that will boost their learning speed enormously. The advanced level is for me the most important. It is the level at which you start to read and understand foreign online newspapers, for example. If you are studying a language of one of the nations that the Western elites want you to hate and mistrust, eg, Syria, Russia or Iran, this can potentially take you light-years beyond the obnoxious lies and distortions of Western press and pols. You will even see that many of the activists who purport to be open to Russia are Establishment shills IF, that is, you are willing to doggedly pursue the objective facts.

http://laiglesforum.com/how-to-learn-a-foreign-language/4127.htm

The following is my translation of the next part of this Russian language article (Part 4 here). It pertains to subs and missiles.

Http://inosmi.ru/military/20170302/238812175.html

The Lada project is the latest attempt of the Russian fleet to create a compact diesel submarine that will be very difficult to detect.

© RIA Novosti, Alexey Danichev | Go to the photobank

Diesel submarine “St. Petersburg”

The submarine is quieter than its Soviet predecessor, the Kilo sub; it is also quieter than the engines of any of the modern Russian submarines.

Development of the “Lada” class began in the late 1990s. The first submarine of this project, the “St. Petersburg,” was launched in 2005. Currently, this submarine is the only submarine of the Lada class in production, but in the next few years  Russia plans to build two more of them.

Unlike the Borey class, the Lada is not designed to transport ballistic missiles. It is a non-nuclear combat submarine equipped with modern self-guided torpedoes for the destruction of other subs and ships. In addition, submarines of the Lada class are equipped with Vodopad torpedoes, created in Soviet times and intended to destroy other subs.

Details about this boat are for the most part kept under wraps. According to some information, the sub, with a length a 72 meters, can dive to a depth of 300 meters, and carries a crew of 37 sailors and officers. The sub’s maximum speed while submerged is 21 knots.

The Lada project is also known as the St. Petersburg class, and its subs are adapted for operations in the Baltic Sea and other relatively shallow waters.

9K720 “Iskander” missiles can hit Sweden

9K720 Iskander missiles are short-range ballistic missiles that can carry a nuclear warhead. The Iskander missile system replaced the old Soviet Scud system.

© RIA Novosti, Yevgeny Biyatov | Go to the photobank

Missile system Iskander-M

In addition to nuclear weapons, the Iskander can be equipped with many different types of warheads. Examples include high-precision bombs capable of penetrating the walls of a concrete bunker, cluster bombs and even electromagnetic missiles for destroying enemy radar systems.

At launch, the Iskander missile weighs about 3.8 tons and travels at speeds as high as 2,100 meters per second, making it very difficult for enemy air defenses to intercept it.

The missile systems are located near Kaliningrad, the former Koenigsberg in East Prussia, which at the end of the Second World War became part of Russia.

Last week, Iskander missile systems were transported from Luga, near St. Petersburg, to Baltiysk. The range of the missiles is from 400 to 500 kilometers, which means that they can strike southeastern Sweden.

In Baltiysk, which is located about 40 km west of Kaliningrad, the bulk of the Russian Baltic fleet is anchored.

Next comes the Soviet-era missile system, which is still used in the Baltic states.

Tactical missile system OTR-21 “Tochka”

The missile system OTP-21 “Tochka” is a tactical ballistic missile that was introduced to the world back in 1976. When the NATO Military Alliance learned of its existence, it was given the classification name SS-21 Scarab.

© RIA Novosti, Igor Zarembo | Go to the photobank

Preparation of the Tochka missile system for launching a tactical missile at the Pavenkovo ??military training ground in the Kaliningrad region

In the ’70s, the “Tochka” was considered a revolutionary breakthrough, because it used inertial navigation, which favorably differed from the predecessor of “Luna-M”.

The most modern version, which NATO calls Scarab C, weighs 1.8 tons, and has a range of 185 kilometers.

The missile can be equipped with either a conventional warhead or a tactical nuclear head.

SS-21 is part of the 53rd rocket brigade stationed in Chernyakhovsk, Kaliningrad region, says defense analyst Jörgen Elfving, a former lieutenant colonel working at the National Defense Institute.

“Every year, according to the Russia’s plan, two rocket brigades are re-equipped and receive Iskander-Ms. When the brigade in Chernyakhovsk will be re-equipped is not known, but in the course of the debates in Russia it is often said that placing Iskander in Kaliningrad can be an adequate response to training activities of NATO and deployment of their forces in Eastern Europe, “says Jorgen Alfving.

The S-400 can pursue 80 enemy aircraft at the same time

The S-400 is the new star of Russian air defense. The mobile anti-aircraft system is considered the most modern version of defense against enemy missiles and aircraft, along with the touted Israeli system “Iron Dome”.

The S-400 has a very advanced tracking system that can target 80 missiles and planes simultaneously. The main task of the S-400 is to neutralize the enemy’s missiles and aircraft before they reach Russian territory.

The anti-aircraft missile system uses three types of missiles: the 40N6 with a range of 400 km, the 48N6 with a range of 250 km and the 9M96, a version with a range of 120 km.

The launched missile travels toward the target at a speed of just over 1,000 meters per second.

In 2009, the Russian Armed Forces reported the deployment of S-400 complexes near the North Korean border. This was done in order to destroy the nuclear missiles of North Korea in the event they should mistakenly approach the Russian territory. [Even as wild-eyed US conspiracy theorists claim that Russia and N. Korea are military partners. It is safe to say this is pure fantasy, but what’s new?—Don]

Production of the S-400 began in 2007, and the system was developed in the late 1990s. Since then, at least 152 complexes have been deployed.

These complexes are included in the at Gvardeysk 183rd anti-aircraft missile regiment  in Kaliningrad. S-400s were deployed in the Kaliningrad region in 2012.

Their predecessor, the S-300VM, was exported, for example, to the oil-rich country of Venezuela in South America.

Next on the list is a bomber that Russia has stationed near Sweden.

End of translation

I have just made a huge discovery. A comprehensive Wikipedia article shows that the US does not use MIRVs to shoot down incoming ICBMs (BTW, Wikipedia is mainly for an overview. It is like the skeleton on which the flesh is suspended. Of course, you will need to go farther, but it is a good place to start).

Obama officially ended the use of MIRVs on US air defense missiles: http://allthingsnuclear.org/emacdonald/the-end-of-mirvs-for-u-s-icbms

He did not require Russia to do likewise. That’s why Western and Israeli aircraft entering Syrian air space are taking a huge risk.

The following article shows that the current strategy using ground based intercept missiles is a huge boondoggle, but congress is happy to spend your money on it as long as you are ignorant of this fact. Will Trump be the one to wake us up or will he spend even more of our dollars on the boondoggles?

https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/182175-the-united-states-missile-defense-system-will-never-work-which-is-why-were-spending-more-money-on-it

Expert opinions that I have read tell us that even the sophisticated Russian MIRV systems used with the S-400, and soon the S-500 missiles, are probably not going to be able to stop a hypersonic missile. Both the Russians and the US had therefore best start being friendly. God knows, Russia has tried over and over again.

One of the best weapons against ignorance regarding “the other” is to learn his language. What I have learned is that there is no “other,” none at all. But there is an enemy, and he is ignorance. I recognized that I had to fight this enemy first in myself and then in others. Once he is vanquished, the world will be a safe place — at least as safe as before the Neocons and the “Enlightened Ones” like Bonaparte, Hitler, Bush, Clinton, Obama, McCain, Graham, Schumer and all that gang arrived on the scene to “help.”

The Enlightenment: Philosophical origin of the Deep State

The Enlightenment: philosophical origin of the Deep State

by Don Hank

Some observers of current events are repeating the centuries-old notion that religion causes wars, and there is plenty of evidence in European history to support this notion. The rejection of religion as a philosophical trend flourished in the Age of Enlightenment and it was the excesses of the Catholics and also many of their opponents, the early Protestant sects, that fed into this. The novel Candide by Voltaire is a catalogue of such excesses. However, Voltaire’s ideas represent only the more radical branch of the Enlightenment, which bitterly opposes Christianity, while the writings of, say, Pascal and Locke, plead for a more enlightened Christianity rather than the abolition of the religion altogether. The current blatant Russophobia and pro-Saudi (ie, anti-Assad, anti-Shiite – eg, anti-Iran and pro-terrorist) policies of the US are an extension of this radical form of the Enlightenment, which promotes radical Islam for only one reason and that is, to oppose Christianity – ie, the same reason they promote LGBT. Otherwise you could not explain why they support two phenomena with such diametrically opposite and mutually antagonistic effects.

Thus, the age of the “enlightenment” is still ongoing and the radical form of it is overpowering the West with almost no one realizing this on either side of the aisle. Some people blame this evil on the Jews, but in fact, the Jews cannot be expected to support Christianity wholeheartedly. If US so-called Christians were smarter, neither the Jews nor any other minority could put a dent in our general American culture, just as they cannot harm Russia, where Christians have generally been kind to Jews but refuse to be manipulated – and this is easier for the Russians because the Russians defeated fascism and Soviet propaganda and literature focused on the harmony between Jews and Russians (which is not to say that Jews were always treated kindly by Russian groups). For example, the Soviet novel The Sword and Shield by Vadim Kozhevnikov, which Russian President Vladimir Putin claims influenced his decision to join the KGB, poignantly contrasts the Third Reich’s abuse of the Jews with the Soviets’ respectful treatment of them (while this novel is available on line free of charge in Russian, no unexpurgated English-language editions are available in the US, where every effort is made by the Deep State to keep the kinder aspects of Soviet Russia away from curious eyes).  An example of Putin’s kind but firm attitude toward Russian Jews was on display when he visited the Schneerson Library in Moscow. He mentioned to them that the library was nationalized during the first government of the Soviet Union, which he said was made up of at least 80% Jews It was a reminder that the Russians are tolerant of other religions, but also a subtle hint that nothing like this takeover of a Christian country by a radical minority hostile to Russian Orthodoxy would be allowed to happen again. This stands in stark contrast to the disproportionate power that AIPAC wields in the US government, where it has been challenged since the 70s by different administrations to declare itself a foreign agent but has always won court cases, despite the blatant illegality of this situation.

Meanwhile, the American government supports fascist Ukraine today, for example, and EU states put Jews in harm’s way by indiscriminate immigration policies toward refugees from terror-exporting states. Consequently, very few Jews still live in Europe today. Thus the West implements a hypocritical policy toward its Jews that makes no sense to many Americans.

Putin represents the milder and more reasonable version of both the Enlightenment and Christianity and he therefore represents the only world power that effectively offsets terrorism while also respecting its Muslim and Jewish populations. He has the only formula that can succeed.

The West is failing with its defense of the radical form of the Enlightenment ideas that led to the bloody French revolution, Bonaparte’s catastrophic romp thru Europe and Russia, and Stalin’s and Mao’s murderous excesses. The creation of ISIS by the US-Israeli-Saudi axis can trace its lineage back to these same old radical ideas. If the West ever grows a brain it will begin to study and implement Putin’s policies. I would urge universities to offer a course in Putinology, as suggested here.

What you “know” about Aleppo is not true

Aleppo war hypocrisy uncovered

translation and commentary by Don Hank

Featured below is my translation of an article on the site of Movimento 5 Stelle (m5s), an increasingly popular anti-Establishment party which, if it comes to power in the vacuum created by Prime Minister Renzi’s resignation, is likely to take Italy out of the euro. Unlike the UK, whose leaders tenaciously still cling to the EU following the Brexit, Italy’s exit from the euro could be more brusque and throw the EU into a tailspin. Of the major anti-elite parties in the EU core countries, m5s is the boldest, most astute and most brutally honest in its critical analysis of western military and foreign policy. The article below should be book-marked for reference because it lists casualty estimates for the “good” war in Mosul and the “bad” war in Aleppo and shows that the numbers of civilians killed in US-waged wars and the Israeli conflicts with Palestine are extremely high, making Western criticism of Russia and the Syrian government look hypocritical. The article does not list the casualties in Aleppo simply because we hear or read about these every day thanks to the media dutiful reporting them in a tone clearly condemnatory of Russia (and Assad), as if only Russian wars entailed collateral damage.  This article sets the record straight, highlighting the rank hypocrisy of the US and allies.

I took the trouble to investigate independently the casualty statistics listed by Fulvio Scaglione in his article below. Here are links to 3 months of UN figures cited:

http://www.iraqinews.com/features/unami-announces-death-toll-iraq-september/

http://reliefweb.int/report/iraq/un-casualty-figures-iraq-month-october-2016-enar

http://reliefweb.int/report/iraq/un-casualty-figures-iraq-month-october-2016-enar

Not all of the deaths can be attributed directly to US intervention. However, ISIS and its opponents killed a very large number of people as a result of the Obama administration’s refusal to prevent ISIS from entering the towns and cities. He did, however, provide arms to “moderate” terrorists in Syria.

While many conservatives take a dim view of the UN, this organization is the only one providing data of t his kind. Without the UN, the world would be reliant mostly on biased data from outlets loyal to the US government that caused  much of the suffering.

Sadly, from my personal association with prominent and less prominent Brexit activists I have seen that only a minority of them understand that declaring their independence from the EU is only half the battle. They seem unaware that the real enemies are the US and NATO, which constantly beat the war drums against Russia and Assad, despite their own illegal and failed invasions in the Middle East, Ukraine and Kosovo, which leave the world infinitely less safe than before their interventions.

I receive alerts from the main anti-EU parties and after reading their literature, for years in some cases, I would rank them as follows in terms of their grasp of the geopolitical reality, particularly regarding US-waged wars. From most aware to least aware, they are:

Movimento 5 Stelle (m5s) (founded by Beppe Grillo. they will field a candidate for prime minister)

Front National  (founded by Marine LePen, who is eyeing a run for president of France)

Partij voor de Vrijhijd /Freedom Party (founded by Geert Wilders, who is eying a run for prime minister of Holland)

I am not including UKIP (UK Independent Party) in this list because Brits are split on their feelings toward the Atlanticist Establishment; while UKIP was instrumental in bringing about the exit of the UK from the EU, they were only one of several influential groups in that endeavor.   I would put Nigel Farage personally high on the list, because he is in line with Donald Trump – willing to deal with, rather than demonize, the Russians and Syrians. He has in fact traveled to the US to endorse Trump. However, the Brexit groups are divided with regard to remaining in NATO. Some think NATO is necessary for “defence,” despite the fact that all of NATO’s actions in recent years have been offensive and have violated international law regarding sovereignty of states. I also am not including the AfD because there is, at this point, virtually no chance that Germany will exit the EU any time soon.

 

http://www.beppegrillo.it/2016/12/la_guerra_di_aleppo_non_e_solo_come_ve_la_raccontano.html

What they’re not telling you about the war in Aleppo

Movimento 5 Stelle /5 Star Movement   The blog of the stars

by Fulvio Scaglione for TPI

The battle of Aleppo, with the bloodshed of recent days and the terrible years that preceded them, marked among other things the collapse of the Western information system , which is almost indistinguishable from partisan propaganda at this point. Everything in the Western narrative about Aleppo smacks of fraud and deceit. Since the publication of unfiltered and unverified data provided by the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, founded and headed by an adversary of Bashar al-Assad and maintained by the British government, the word “siege” has been applied liberally for Aleppo but only in recent months, and never in the over three years that the city was attacked from three sides by rebels and jihadis, who came to occupy 60 percent of the urban territory.

But in a way, these are small details. The real issue is the refusal to confront a reality which can be summarized as: what happened in Aleppo in recent weeks is not at all exceptional. On the contrary, it is the norm of contemporary war. Don’t believe us? Then let’s have a look around. Take Mosul, the largest Iraqi city, which has been occupied by ISIS for two and a half years.

In mid-October the offensive to free it from the jihadists got underway (finally). Great fanfare, triumphant tones, exultation for civilians who “were being freed” from areas previously under the control of militants (while civilians in Aleppo who come from the neighborhoods dominated by al-Nusra Front, are not liberated but rather “escape”). Now, two months later, everything has come to a standstill and no one is talking about liberating Mosul. Not only that, the offensive by Americans, Kurds and Iraqis has been halted to such an extent that ISIS has removed 4-5 thousand fighters from the Iraqi front and sent them to retake Palmyra in Syria. Why?

The answer is very simple. The two and a half years of grueling bombing campaign gave ISIS plenty of time to organize the defenses in the city. The roads were mined or boarded up or replaced by galleries known only to the militia fighters. Some buildings were demolished to clear lines of fire; elsewhere walls were built to block the lines of fire and passage of the attackers. Finally, thousands of civilians were trapped to be used as human shields.

To be “liberated” Mosul will have to become another Aleppo: the bombings, civilian casualties, children torn apart by the strikes, and so on. There is an alternative, namely, house to house combat with hundreds and hundreds of dead Iraqis and Kurds — which has already been going on, even if military operations are almost at a standstill.

The UN Mission for assistance to Iraq (UNAMI), directed by Jan Kubis, former Foreign Minister of Slovakia (2006-2009), has made available mind-boggling data on the number of Iraqi deaths, civilian and other, of the last few months. In September, ie before the offensive on Mosul, the number of Iraqi civilians killed was 609 (951 injured); the number rose to 1,120 (with 1,005 injured) in October and to 926 (930 injured) in November.

As for the military and other combatants, the figures are: 394 killed (208 injured) in September, 672 killed (353 injured) in October, 1959 killed (and 450 injured) in November. Result? Everything blocked, meaning further suffering for imprisoned civilians in Mosul and more time for ISIS to continue building up.

Of course, nouveaux philosophes [a group similar to the Neocons in the US—Don Hank] and other clowns can harp on atrocities and human rights violations in Aleppo. But they are nothing but hypocrites. In 2004, the US Army fought two battles to “liberate” the Iraqi city of Fallujah, in fact occupied by the militants of al-Qaeda, the forerunners of the militants of al-Nusra, which play such an important role in the battle of Aleppo.

According to the independent NGO Iraq Body Count, between 572 and 616 civilians died in the first battle (April 2004); between 581 and 670 died in the second (November 2004) battle. The Americans used phosphorus arms and apparently depleted uranium. Have you ever heard of any new philosophers rending their garments over this? Do you recall Corriere de Sera [an establishment newspaper–Don] ever mentioning “slaughterhouse” in headlines about Fallujah, as it did referring to Aleppo?

 

And what about Gaza? According to the most conservative data, which are those published by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, only 45 percent of the 2,100 Palestinians killed in the Gaza Strip during the 2014 war were real civilians and non-combatants. That’s still 945 unarmed people killed in two months of clashes.

Thus it was the very countries that now cry foul over the Aleppo operations, that block motions censure Israel at the UN.  And isn’t Gaza a perfect copy of the eastern districts of Aleppo, attacked with bombs by the Russians and by Assad’s Syrians?

And yet UNICEF has informed us that in the first six months of 2016, Afghanistan had a record number of civilian casualties: 1,601 dead and 3,565 wounded. The worst half-year since the anti-Taliban invasion in 2001. According to UN estimates, 60 percent of Afghan civilians are vulnerable to attack by the Taliban and other insurgent groups and criminals.

But 40 percent of 1,601 deaths is still 640 deaths, or 640 innocent Afghans killed in six months (more than 3 per day) by troops arriving from our countries, that is, by those who are supposed to be protecting and “liberating” them. But everyone is silent; these dead do not deserve the indignation reserved for the dead of eastern  Aleppo.

Thus the war of our times is utterly disgusting. Those who pretend to believe that in Chechnya and Aleppo different things were done than elsewhere, for example in Fallujah or Gaza, are quite simply lying. All of today’s wars are fought on the backs of civilians. All of them.

And in all wars, the armed men, with or without uniforms, are, at the most, collateral victims. Politicians, military people and terrorists know this quite well. So the real issue is to avoid wars as much as possible, not to pretend that there are good wars and bad wars.

(translation from the Italian by Don Hank)

 

Hoax busted: There is no US-Saudi relationship

Hoax busted: the American people have NO relations with the Saudis

 

by Don Hank

 

A Neocon article titled Analysis: Russian jets in Iran change Mideast game – Middle East criticizes the new “game changing” arrangement between Iran and Russia in which the latter uses Iran’s airport facilities as a home base for its anti-ISIS bombing missions. While the author calls his piece an analysis, it is in fact blatant propaganda, distorting the nature of the “game change” he describes.

 

QUOTE:

“…this type of change is definitely not in the interests of the US, America’s traditional Sunni-Arab allies in the region, nor Israel.”

 

In fact, the US-Saudi relationship touted by the author is not a relationship between the US people and the Saudis, although the sneaky author would like us to believe it is. We the People obviously have no interest whatsoever in a relationship that spawned the Taliban, al-Qaeda and ISIS, destroyed previously stable partner countries like Iraq, Libya and Syria and seriously threatened Egypt until el-Sisi stepped in, all of which has served only to erode US prestige and credibility in the world. The American people have, in fact, an existential interest in ending this ill-conceived US Establishment-Saudi relationship as soon as ever possible, while the financial elites, notably the Federal Reserve Board, know that the Saudis are the key to propping up a dollar that has practically no other support in our debt-based economy and government. It is known that, under the secretive petrodollar agreement between the US elites and the Saudis, the US government has promised to protect the Saudi royals and their oil fields in exchange for their charging only US dollars for their oil and buying US sovereign bonds as financial reserves, all of which have been, since the early 70s, keeping the value of the US dollar artificially high. But what is not known is how much further that agreement goes in reality, thanks to terms brokered in secret, either since the original deal or at the time Richard Nixon and King Faisal signed it. What is known, however, is that all US wars outside the New World, without exception (ie, even the Kosovo war), have clearly benefited violent and intolerant Saudi Wahhabism, but in no way benefited the US people, and this is all a sinister indication that the agreement goes much deeper than is known. Indeed, looking back over the last 50 odd years of warfare, initiated by the US on the flimsiest of grounds, Washington and Wall Street appear to have sold out US interests and even the interests of civilization itself in exchange for a strong dollar worth far beyond any economy-based intrinsic value, enabling them to “print” unbacked dollars in QEs 1 through 3 and possibly beyond without having to pay for the value thereby stolen from other economies throughout the world.

By contrast with secretive US-Sunni (Wahhabi) cooperation, the Russia-Shiite relationship brought about the first sincere attempt to stop ISIS, thereby thwarting the once unchallenged Saudi-US relationship.

The US then reluctantly followed Russia’s example by attacking ISIS in Iraq, politically unable to do otherwise but knowing that in so doing it was flirting with the possible rupture of the dollar-supporting agreement described above, and hence with financial disaster for the elites.

Further, the rearrangement of the Middle East chessboard has not only led to Russia’s establishment of an airbase in Shiite Iran but, prior to this, had led to a flourishing relationship between Netanyahu and Putin, which has benefited both countries. There can be no question that Israel-US relations are now much cooler and unproductive than Russia-Israel relations. (But remember that the US and Russia have swapped roles both domestically and in terms of foreign policy).

Thus the crucial difference between US foreign policy and Russian foreign policy is that the US has so far cultivated good relations only with one side – the Sunnis and their radical Wahhabi terrorists (posing at times as “moderates”) and also with the warlike Likud Party in Israel (instead of reconciling both the hawks and the Israeli factions that want peace) – a policy that necessarily leads to the untenable situation of perpetual conflict, while Russia has taken the broader view, trying to cultivate relations with both Sunnis and Shia, and just as importantly, with Israel, in an attempt to bring permanent peace between Sunni and Shia in the Middle East and end the Palestine-Israel conflict. (BTW, there is another unseen aspect to all of this in that many Western Christians believe – in large part under encouragement from sly Neocons – that any US attempt to bring about peace in the Middle East is unbiblical and that somehow, God wants them to support, or at least passively consent to, senseless wars in order to fulfill prophecies that carry unspecified time frames and schedules. Yet this lack of specific time settings makes these prophecies hard to pin down and makes a rigid interpretation inappropriate at best. Further, there is no biblical commandment or even suggestion that Christians are supposed to consent to or participate in wars at any time in history — the way so many of them did during the Iraq invasion, believing at first — thanks to sly propaganda efforts willingly perpetrated by fooish clergy — that this disastrous war that saw the banishment of most Iraqi Christians, was godly. Thus Christianity has been used as a tool of Satanists thanks to the lack of common sense and spiritual discernment of these pawns with little grasp of the scriptures. I showed previously how these Christians are disobeying an important commandment of Jesus).

So yes, this new Russia-Iran arrangement is not in the interests of the US if we define the US as the Neocon perpetual war Establishment (including Obama and Hillary), and it is not in the interest of the Saudi Wahhabists whose ultimate goal is the total annihilation of Shia and Christians as well as civilization as we know it. But the Saudis, with their intolerance toward people with different opinions and religions, certainly do not deserve to be given by the US, through stealth or otherwise, the green light to continue founding and funding terror groups throughout the world, whether or not their rampaging props up the greenback, because such is obviously immoral unless you are a Neocon or central banker. Thus, Washington’s oft-times schizophrenic foreign policy is precisely due to the fact that, while the elites have constantly supported the barbaric Saudi regime and its thinly veiled terror campaign (for the reasons enunciated above), the ordinary people whom they despise sense that this policy is insane and threatens civilization.

The Establishment has been playing the mischievous wizard behind the curtain. But thanks in large part to Donald Trump, and to alternative media, this curtain is now in tatters and ordinary people can easily discern the wizard and his evil machinations. Whether or not Trump wins the presidency, it is only a matter of time before the wizard’s workshop will be permanently closed down.

Will Putin hand Trump the presidency?

Will Putin hand the presidency to Trump?

by Don Hank

I was invited to participate in a conversation among a group of friends who are hoping that the Kremlin will turn over their cache of Hillary emails obtained via the Romanian hacker “Guccifer” just in time to smear her prior to the November election. Judge Napolitano has stated that the Kremlin is holding these emails and is not sure what to do with them. The group was hopeful that Putin would reveal the content of this cache just in time for Hillary to be indicted before elections. Here is my reply to the group:

Yes, this could be a big deal.

But remember that Putin has an iron-clad policy of never interfering in the internal affairs of what he calls “partner” countries.

Putin must stick to this policy to avoid hypocrisy because he has publicly opposed interference by the State Department in the color revolutions, the Arab Spring and the military interventions in Kosovo, Libya, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc, nations that have been utterly ruined by Washington’s intervention. Thus by failing so abjectly in every attempt at control, Washington has handed Russia a huge propaganda advantage and he will not fritter it away by imitating Washington’s interference in other countries’ politics … including US politics. It is his principle (part of what I have called the Putin Principle) to avoid such chicanery, thereby presenting a stark contrast with Washington “leaders” and in so doing – ie, by his studied refusal to interfere – letting the world beat a path to Moscow – as Netanyahu has done just this week, for example.

He must come across to existing and potential trade and military partners as squeaky clean in this regard and not be seen interfering in anyone’s business, except, for example, to be seen as protecting the lives of minorities in Syria, or of Russian speakers in E. Ukraine, who have, you will recall, been bombed from the air and subjected to murders and abuse by fascist thugs of the Right Sector who revere men like Stepan Bandera, a Nazi who aided Hitler in killing Ukrainian Poles back in the day (these openly fascist partisans march in parades with photos of these old “heroes”). Unfortunately, these lumpenproletariat are all seen as part of the US-backed Kiev government. We own them and that fact makes Putin look like a white knight by contrast. Dim-witted State Department and Pentagon officials, as well as professional Russophobes (whom I exposed recently for the phonies they are), whine that RT (Russia Today) is “Russian propaganda” and some have even suggested banning it or imposing a heavy tariff on its revenues in the US. But the reality is that US foreign policy has been Russia’s best propaganda.

You will recall that when asked what he thought of Trump, Putin’s answer was totally apolitical. He only made a vague reference to Trump’s intelligence, which was misinterpreted by Trump to mean Putin thought he was a “genius.” Not quite, but it was a nice gesture on Volodya’s part (the nickname is not “Vlad” in Russian BTW). He pointedly commented at the time “we do not interfere in anyone’s internal affairs,” a comment that went over most Western heads because most of us refuse to believe that no other governments could possibly abstain from Washington-type skullduggery. “They’re all doing it.”

Just remember: Putin’s argument is that it was interference on the part of USAID, “sandwich girl” Victoria Nuland, Geroge Soros (who admitted on national TV that he was involved in the Maidan coup — the subject of my report here: http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/hank/140530) and the top “leaders” of EU countries (like President Rutte of Holland, Germany’s foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, etc), who personally blundered into the Maidan deceitfully presenting the EU as a potential savior — just as the EU had done in Greece), that turned Ukraine into a showcase of grandiose failure with an economy about on the level of Haiti’s). Thus Russia, which has never bankrupted another country, is holding all the propaganda cards thanks to the endless trail of failed states left behind by the West. Putin intends to hold on to these cards. He said in his autobiography that even in his youth, he never gambled. He won’t start now.

Thus Putin must and will be very careful not to look like another meddler because he has billed Russia as the anti-meddler and he will tend this image like a gardener tending a prize rose bud. So don’t expect him to openly threaten Hillary with blowing her whistle. He can’t afford to even appear to do this, as much as he would certainly like to.

Sure, he has some sympathy with Trump, but after all, Trump has waffled on his stance toward Putin and on Syria. None of us — including Vladimir Putin, is too sure what he would do as president.

That is another reason Putin must hold his cards close to his vest — something he is very good at.

So as much as he might want to help, and as much as my email group may yearn for it, Donald J. Trump will have to find his own way to the White House.. But after all, he is a “genius,” isn’t he?

 

Anti-Russianism is every bit as dangerous as anti-Semitism

Anti-Russian is as bad as anti-Jewish. Both are dangerous

by Don Hank

After I published yesterday’s article, titled “RT condemned as anti-Jewish for copying a Jewish newspaper’s headline verbatim,” I received another email from the Russia-hating friend who had alerted me to the article condemning RT for its headline. She said that Ha’aretz is a leftist site, implying that it is not representative of the Israeli people. Let me ask then – suspending disbelief and assuming it does not represent Israel – why did CAMERA not criticize Ha’aretz in addition to RT? Further, after receiving that email, I found another Israeli site that also ran that same offending headline. So you have two Israeli sites running a headline and no one bats an eyelash, but when RT publishes verbatim the news feed from one of them, they are condemned as being “dramatically absurd.”  I don’t know how absurd can be dramatic (the language is suspiciously reminiscent of Accuracy in Media), but if there is such a concept, then should it not apply to all offending sites alike, whether Israeli or Russian or whatever? It is clear from the content of the RT article that no offense was intended. I cannot say the same about the statements by CAMERA. And you know what? PM Netanyahu just returned from a meeting with Putin and the web site of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs today ran a very respectful report on that meeting, in which Netanyahu thanks Putin for his cooperation, and says he expects another 25 years of Israeli-Russian cooperation.

The friend further writes: “Bibi is playing KGB Putin like a fine fiddle!  Americans are NOT taken in by your KGB comrade.”

Now that raises questions. The Russophobes all seem to agree that Putin is deceitful and wants to pull a dirty trick on the West (speculation ranges upwards to a nuclear attack). However, this person, who obviously admires Netanyahu, is saying in her above-cited email, that Netanyahu intends to betray Putin. Now if that were true (and she gives no evidence to back this up), then why condemn Putin for being sneaky and treacherous when she believes the man she admires is also sneaky and treacherous? This just goes to show the irrational and racist double standard applied to Russia.

But beyond that, I do not believe for a minute that either of these gentlemen dislike or mistrust each other. Quite to the contrary, they have cooperated in Syria, where Putin has helped save the lives of Israeli pilots near or in the Golan Heights. Plus, as Putin reminds him at each meeting, both nations have suffered  immensely at the hands of the fascists. I believe that Netanyahu senses a close brotherly bond with Putin and the Russians that results from that historic experience. Further, they are both brave warriors, each in his own way, and each one loves his own country. Moreover, each has reason to fear the other’s military prowess, and this fear has grown into mutual respect. Netanyahu must also know that Putin’s cooperation with Israel has put a strain on Iran-Russia relations and that Putin is willing to accept this strain because  he values his relationship with the PM and with the Israeli people.

Everyone needs to remember the lesson of the Holocaust, namely, that humanity must be constantly wary of any signs of racism and root it out wherever it rears its head. Anti-Jewish speech and actions are routinely referred to as racist (even though Jews do not, strictly speaking, constitute a race). The exact same yardstick must be applied to the Russians, who lost several times more lives in WW II than any other nation. Who therefore know more about war and peace than any other nation. Who are doing the job we should be doing by eliminating ISIS in the Middle East. And who are therefore our natural and logical friends and allies.

We are now closer to a nuclear conflagration than ever before in history, precisely because of the irrational Russia baiting I highlighted in yesterday’s, and now this, article. It is exactly the wrong time to be antagonizing or baiting another nuclear power, even if you don’t like its internal politics or foreign policies.

Pray for peace, friends. Let’s none of us be hatin’ on anyone else.

Matthew 5:46.

Again, all people of good will need to be able to say: God bless Israel! God bless Russia! God bless America!

New details on US-Saudi deal suggest Washington supporting terrorist regime

New details of US-Saudi deal suggest Washington supports terror

 

by Don Hank

Bloomberg recently exposed the storykept under wraps for over 40 yearsof the US-Saudi petrodollar agreement under which the US agreed to use its military to protect the Saudi family in exchange for the Saudis’ demanding US dollars as payment for oil and buying US Treasuries. The US officials who disclosed this story said that King Faisal insisted the deal should be kept secret because anti-US sentiment in the Middle East was running high due to US support for the Yom Kippur War.

The fact that the Saudis insisted on secrecy in this petrodollar deal suggests that there may well still be secrets yet to be revealed.

Considering that all US involvement in wars and US support for government coups outside the Western Hemisphere since 1974 greatly benefitted the Saudis and harmed the US people (Saudi support for terror, trillions of dollars spent on wars all supporting Sunni Islamization), it is highly likely that part of this agreement – certainly an unwritten part – called for the US indirectly to help spread Wahhabism everywhere. Because this is exactly what the US government did in its foreign and military policy for over 40 years. Don’t tell me it was all a coincidence!

Recap:

GW Bush covered up Saudi complicity in the 2001 terror attacks on the Twin Towers, as reported here.

QUOTE:

Case agents I’ve interviewed at the Joint Terrorism Task Forces in Washington and San Diego, the forward operating base for some of the Saudi hijackers, as well as detectives at the Fairfax County (Va.) Police Department who also investigated several 9/11 leads, say virtually every road led back to the Saudi Embassy in Washington, as well as the Saudi Consulate in Los Angeles.

Yet time and time again, they were called off from pursuing leads. A common excuse was “diplomatic immunity.”

Bush’s Iraqi war ended up with the Assyrian Christians leaving the country in droves. They had survived 2000 years of persecution but finally succumbed to the US-Saudi-led war that installed their enemies in power. The Saudis aim to eliminate Christianity from all predominantly Muslim regions. Hence, it was a Saudi win, but, like all US military engagements outside the Western hemisphere, it was at the same time a devastating loss – in terms of money, morale and security – for the once-Christian US.

The US-led war in Kosovo converted this cradle of Serbian Christianity into an exclusively Muslim domain, where the last Christian residents, who had spent their lives there since infancy, were mercilessly persecuted and almost all Christian monuments, such as cemeteries and churches, were, and are still being, destroyed and desecrated (http://laiglesforum.com/look-whats-happening-in-the-european-region-that-nato-defended/3786.htm). Again, this debacle was a clear-cut loss for the US people but a resounding victory in terms of Saudi goals. Indeed, Saudi money was reported to have “flooded Kosovo” after the war.

US Support for the Egyptian spring was apparently motivated by a desire to establish the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood in that country in compliance with Saudi wishes. I say that because there is no way that US officials could have expected democracy to bloom in that hotbed of  Islamic fanaticism. It succeeded under Mursi until he was ousted by Al Sisi. During Mursi’s reign, Christians were persecuted. A Christian Egyptian lady I know told me her husband had traveled back to Egypt during the Mursi regime and when they asked him where he intended to visit, and he mentioned the name of a predominantly Christain town, he was unceremoniously put on the next flight back to the US. At the time of this telling, they had never learned the fate of his family. As stated above, the Saudis aim to eliminate Christianity from all predominantly Muslim regions. A major US loss, a resounding victory in terms of Saudi goals – until the Egyptian military stepped in.

Libya was run by a secular Muslim leader who established stability and relative peace among all factions including Christians. The Saudis also aim to eliminate all secular leaders, mostly because they promote tolerance of Christians and Shia. Within a year after the criminal murder of Ghadaffi, aided by US-NATO forces, Libya fell into the hands of warring factions, predominantly ISIS, which adheres to Saudi Wahhabism and is a US-Saudi brainchild. Another Saudi victory, another loss – and humiliation for We the People.

The US supports the ouster of Bashar Al-Assad, a non-Sunni (Saudi Wahhabism is a Sunni sect), who also protects the Christians in his country.  Assad is also an ally of Christian Russia, making him doubly a target of the Saudis. The US motivation is pure and simple: Keep the Saudis happy by trumping up mostly unproven charges against Assad and training terror groups to defeat him. The US slyly calls these groups “rebels” but all of them are Islamists who will introduce Shariah law and persecute Christians. Many are linked to Al-Qaeda and have also passed on US-donated arms to Al-Qaeda and ISIS.

The dogged Neocon press insists that Iran is the biggest supporter of terror, despite the fact that this largely Shiite country has never supported any of the terror groups that oppose the West, such as the Taliban, Al-Qaeda and ISIS, all US-Saudi protégées. Arch-Neocon John McCain joked that he would like to bomb Iran. The US legislature was close to supporting an Israeli bombing raid on Tehran. This would have been another black eye for the US but a resounding victory for the Saudis, who aim to eliminate the Shiite religion everywhere in the world.

US antagonism for Russia can also be seen as part of this pattern of behavior intended to keep the Saudis happy.

The above recap of US foreign and military policy is ample circumstantial evidence that the most important elements of the secretive 40 year old petrodollar agreement are not known and may never come to light.

Nonetheless, this commentary is intended to encourage research in this area to see what might still be found, for examples, in records of classified phone, mail or email exchanges between the Washington government and the Saudis, and in the memories of officials involved in past US-Saudi transactions.

After all, confirmation that the government of the largest nominally Christian country in the world has been engaged for over 40 years in aiding and abetting the most intolerant and violent anti-Christian sect in the world – ie, Wahhabism – in its quest to eliminate Christianity everywhere might be a story of some interest.

Commemorating the 1968 anti-Jewish campaign in Poland

Commemorating the March 1968 anti-Jewish campaign in Poland

by Don Hank

The Jerusalem Post recently ran a column commemorating the expulsion of Jews from Poland in March of 1968 in the regime of Wladyslaw Gomulka.

The Jews in communist Poland in 1968 were seen as sympathetic to Israel’s gains in the 6 Day War of 1967, by which Israel seized considerable land, including the Syrian Golan Heights and this angered the communist regime, leading to said expulsion of Jews.

Issues surrounding Israel are always delicate at best, particularly this Six Day War. Note that current Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad’s father Hafez was not yet the leader of Syria at the time of the war, but did side with Russia, which helps explain the Neocon hatred of Bashar Al-Assad today. On the other side of the ledger, Bashar Al-Assad, while still an opponent of Israel due to the loss of territory in the 1967 war, is a stalwart protector of Syrian Christians and other minorities.

Further, in 1994, at President Clinton’s persuasion, his father Hafez had adopted a conciliatory stance toward Israel. Yet when Bashar tried in 2007 to hold peace talks with Israel, the Bush administration took an inexplicable hardline approach. Likewise, Israel rebuffed him with surprising harshness as described here.

QUOTE:

“Attempting once again to break the impasse, Syria’s ambassador to the United States called for talks to achieve a full peace agreement with Israel in late July 2008. “We desire to recognize each other and end the state of war,” Imad Mustafa said in remarks broadcast on Israeli army radio. “Here is then a grand thing on offer. Let us sit together, let us make peace, let us end once and for all the state of war.”

Three days later, Israel responded by sending a team of commandos into Syria to assassinate a Syrian general as he held a dinner party at his home on the coast.”

The first paragraph of the above quote is confirmed here, but this source fills in a missing key fact: the Syrians were offering peace in exchange for return of the Golan Heights to Syria.

The last paragraph of this quoted portion is confirmed by no less than the Times of Israel here.

(Footnote: This bizarre behavior becomes understandable only in light of the US’s petrodollar agreement with the Saudis, by which the US became a de facto mercenary force for Saudi Arabia in exchange for the latter’s propping up the US dollar.  By virtue of its economic and security dependence on the US, Israel is also bound to the same terms, creating a de facto US-Israel-Saudi axis. The Saudis’ Wahhabi sect of Sunni will not tolerate any non-Sunni or secular leader in the Middle East and has enlisted US aid in ousting all such leaders since the mid-60s. Thus you will recall that the attackers on September 11, 2001 were almost all Saudis, who belonged to Al-Qaeda, a Saudi-founded and funded terror group. Yet GW Bush completely ignored these facts and gave the Saudis a pass, apparently believing the US public would never figure out the motivation behind his actions. Be sure your sin will find you out… Numbers 32:23).

Later, in the 70s, Russia staged a similar anti-Jewish purge. These events have led some to consider Russia (and to a lesser extent, Poland) to be anti-Jewish. Yet Putin has traveled to Israel and come back with glowing reports of a prosperous and friendly country. He not only apparently has his own personal positive feelings toward Israel but also knows that Russian Christians consider Israel to be the Holy Land that gave them the Bible and Jesus. Unlike Western leaders, Putin honors the culture and religion of his people. Despite propaganda to the contrary, Christians – whether American or Russian – are the most Israel-friendly group in the world. Putin has also negotiated extensively with Netanyahu, who seems to understand Russia’s potential role as an ally and protector, even as it judiciously maintains a precarious balance between Israel and Hezbollah in Syria.

I was in Poland in the early 70s and heard nothing about this purge. In fact I met Jewish people with important posts in the Polish government.

The point is that it was not the Russian or Polish people who spawned the anti-Jewish sentiment that boiled over in Poland in 1968 and in Russia in the 70s. It was the communist government.

While there are still ultranationalist Russian groups trying to stir up anti-Semitic sentiment, Putin has wisely charted a course that circumvents, and where possible, suppresses these groups. (I watch or read almost all of Putin’s press conferences and speeches and can confirm that no audience member ever asks Putin any anti-Semitic question. It is clear to me that he would severely reprimand anyone who dared to express anti-Semitic views.)

The irony of it all is that the Neocons in the West are trying to minimize, smear and eventually overthrow Putin simply because he will not kowtow to them. Yet they must realize that, should Putin leave office, a real hardline warmonger could come along and replace him. One of the main complaints among the Russians is that Putin is too soft on the West but that is because his is a 100% diplomatic style. I think Putin is by far the smartest statesman the world has seen in a long time, perhaps ever.

Thus the Neocons are on a reckless, potentially suicidal course that could end in WW III, a nuclear one at that.

Donald Trump is the only candidate who does not talk like a warmonger. Ironically, despite all the propaganda to the contrary, the world is probably safer with a Trump presidency.

If Putin is a thug, what is Erdogan?

If Putin is a thug, what is Erdogan?

by Don Hank

A reader forwarded an email exchange between him and a friend who repeats the refrain that Putin is a “thug.” The reader wanted to know how I would answer this friend. I responded as follows.

Western commentators and politicians like to call Putin a thug, based on suppositions and suspicions.

However, when we evaluate human character, since no one is perfect, the conclusion cannot be absolute. To be valid and fair, it must therefore be relative – relative, that is, to other people who are their peers. In this case, to make the evaluation relevant and useful, we would have to compare Putin with a comparable peer or peers among Western allies – in analogy to the use of a control group in scientific studies. Otherwise, if Putin is no more a thug than a US ally is, it would be unfair to Putin and a clear cut sign of Russophobia to call Putin a thug but not others who exhibit similar or worse behavior. But Russophobia is racism, and racists is not who we are – or are we?

Since we are living in the here and now, the only fair evaluation would be a comparison with a comparable peer, say, Turkish president Erdogan, whose country is a NATO member. If we could demonstrate that Putin is more of a thug than Erdogan, then we could perhaps validly call Putin a thug.

In other words, to conclude Putin is a thug would be to conclude that Erdogan is not a thug, or at least that he is significantly less of a thug, since our elites never call Erdogan a thug.

After all, evaluations of foreign leaders are made to assemble useful pragmatic evidence for use in forging foreign policies vis-a-vis the foreign leader in question. It’s a matter of national security.

In the case of Putin, perhaps the most important issue is:

Can we trust Putin enough to cooperate with him, say, in Syria?

Let us just examine this one issue to keep it simple.

Now the internet is awash with reports that Erdogan, via his son Bilal, is buying and selling Syrian oil stolen by ISIS. While complete verification is not yet possible, it is nonetheless certain that there is a thriving oil smuggling business in Turkey and it would be impossible for this to be going on under Erdogan’s nose without him knowing it. A very well-documented report is here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-l-phillips/research-paper-turkey-isi_b_8808024.html.

This suggests 2 things right off the bat:

1—Erdogan’s government is complicit in criminal activity – specifically dealing in stolen goods — a felony.

2—By virtue of the above, Erdogan’s government is a terror supporter and specifically, it supports ISIS, a terror group with which we are at war – or rather We the People are at war with ISIS. Our government is not seriously engaging ISIS on their Syrian turf (thus Obama by his negligence is exposing the people to harm).

So while we may or may not trust Putin, we certainly can see that there is no reason whatsoever to trust Erdogan, particularly in Syria. Further, no one has found credible evidence that Russia supports ISIS or buys ISIS oil. And yet the US Establishment has declared Erdogan an ally in the fight against ISIS and very few Western journalists have protested – even though many of them do protest against cooperating with Putin, who is not buying ISIS oil.

Now comparing Erdogan (and in part, Obama – though he is beyond our narrow scope here) with Putin, we see right away that Putin is fighting ISIS. Our Neocon press is pretending this is not true, but we can easily see that ISIS certainly feels attacked by Russia because when Russia started bombing ISIS targets, ISIS claimed responsibility for the Russian plane downing over Sinai, as reported here http://www.ibtimes.com/isis-group-claims-responsibility-downed-russian-plane-officials-say-malfunction-2163917. (BTW, Turkey had focused its investigation on ISIS in a deadly bombing attack in Ankara months ago but ISIS did not claim responsibility as they normally do, suggesting that Turkey was grasping at straws in an effort to make its alleged opposition to ISIS seem plausible:

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/10/12/middleeast/turkey-ankara-bomb-blast/

“Though no group has claimed responsibility for the deadly weekend bombings in Ankara, the focus of the investigation is the Islamic extremist group ISIS, Turkey’s Prime Minister said Monday.”)

One might contend, however, that the bombing of Syrian hospitals and schools was thuggish, and Putin has been blamed in the Western press for this. But there are several drawbacks to this contention. For one thing, the culprits in the bombing have not been proven to be the Russians, and in fact, the US has also been fingered in this bombing. Further, the Russians have absolutely nothing to gain by bombing civilian facilities, and there therefore is no plausible motive for the Russians, whereas the anti-Russian West has plenty of motive to have done this and pinned it on the Russians.

But thuggishness in foreign leaders also includes bullying and strongarming one’s own people.

Has Putin ever been proved to have bullied his people?

Despite the kangaroo court in the UK where Putin was found “probably” guilty of ordering the murder of Litvinenko, a detailed analysis of the British investigation procedure shows that it was not in keeping even with British law: http://thesaker.is/the-litvinenko-inquiry-londons-absurd-show-trial/ and that there is no such legal precept as “probable guilt.” It is clearly a politically motivated verdict.

There have been an unfortunate number of journalists murdered or suspected to have been murdered in Russia but no link has been established with the government, although some victims were opponents of Putin. However, some of these victims in fact had ties to the underworld while others had run afoul of Chechen Muslims and were apparently killed by terrorists. None of the victims were serious threats to the Putin administration and no strong motive could be established.

Most went unsolved.

In stark contrast to this, it is well known that Erdogan muzzled journalists just before the last presidential election and also has jailed journalists. Erdogan is known to have ordered these thuggish actions, as reported here

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/turkey/11292790/Turkey-president-launches-crackdown-on-opposition-in-their-lairs-as-23-arrested.html

“Turkish police on Sunday launched a series of arrests of journalists and other media workers – including the editor of the country’s biggest-selling daily paper – as a purge of opponents of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan worsened.”

So whereas Putin is only suspected by already anti-Russian governments of having been a thug, Erdogan perpetrated his thuggishness openly and therefore, no investigation is necessary to establish his culpability.

So while the Western political class, press and blogosphere routinely call Putin a thug, and never call Erdogan a thug, we can say that a gross injustice is being done against Putin by highly Russophobic Western officials and politicians.

We could also make a similar comparison with Mohammed bin Salman al Saud, the deputy Saudi crown prince, who recently had 46 people executed, including 4 Shiite leaders. The dominant Saudi sect, ie, Wahhabism, the most intolerant Muslim sect, teaches that non-Sunnis, including Christians, deserve the death penalty. The Saudis founded and sponsor Al-Qaeda and ISIS while claiming they oppose these groups. Killing people for their religious faith is thuggishness by any measure.

Yet Western political “leaders” and commentators never call Mohammed bin Salman a thug and the press that they virtually control also gives him a pass, even while keeping the pressure against Putin high. But why wouldn’t they? Washington has been sending arms to Al-Nusra for years, and the other name for that group is “Al-Qaeda in Syria.” So the Neocons are arming and funding the group that took down the Twin Towers. Yes, it serves their purposes to make Russia look bad.

Clearly, in calling Putin a thug while giving true thugs like Erdogan and Salman a pass, the Western elites are relying on their peoples’ lack of analytical ability and the residual anti-Russian sentiment left over from the Cold War, which, thanks to the tireless propaganda efforts of these elites, is now raging once more, even threatening to become a hot war.

Going  back to our question whether we can trust Putin to cooperate with us in Syria, it looks like he is the only one we really can trust to be effectively fighting ISIS, even as the other “allies” seem to be supporting ISIS by their inaction, by supporting them financially and by opposing the most effective adversaries of ISIS.

Is this effectiveness in defeating ISIS not in fact the reason behind all the slander of Putin by the Establishment?